Connect with us

Published

6 months ago

on

General view of the Towers and oil platforms of the State oil Company of Venezuela, Venezuelan oil Company SA.

Jose Bula Urrutia | Future Publishing | Getty Images

Oil prices didn’t react sharply on Monday after Hezbollah confirmed that its leader was killed on Friday in an Israeli airstrike in the Lebanese capital of Beirut.

Over the weekend, Israel Defense Forces reported that Hassan Nasrallah, who had led the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah for over thirty years, was killed on Friday during a “targeted strike” on the group’s headquarters in Beirut.

Hezbollah, classified as a terrorist organization by several countries including the U.S. and the UK, is known for its violent opposition to Israel and its resistance to Western influence in the Middle East, according to the U.S. Director of National Intelligence and London Assembly.

The incident follows several months of conflict and had raised concerns of a wider conflict involving Iran. The IDF characterized Nasrallah as the group’s “central decision-maker” and “strategic leader.”

But oil markets did not see a significant surge. Global benchmark Brent added 1.56% to $73.10 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures traded 1.09% higher at $68.19 per barrel.

While hostilities throughout the Middle East have ramped up, there has not been any oil supply disruption, observed Andy Lipow, president at Lipow Oil Associates.

“The oil market does not expect an all-out war between Iran and Israel that would impact supply,” he told CNBC via email.

Since Hamas-Israel conflict that started last year, the disruption to the oil market has been limited. The oil market also remains under pressure as increased production from the U.S. Canada and Guyana add to the supply picture, on top of stalling Chinese demand while OPEC+ delayed the restoration of their production cuts, Lipow elaborated.

“The elimination of Hezbollah leadership could trigger a response that spirals into affecting oil supplies, but since it didn’t directly affect [the oil supplies] … the oil market likely won’t price in much additional risk for now,” said Josh Young, CIO at Bison Interests.

However, both experts noted that a rapid escalation in conflict could lead to crude oil prices hitting $100 per barrel.

The biggest risk to the oil market is the closure of the Straits of Hormuz, said Lipow. While unlikely, oil prices would jump by $30 per barrel if it occurred, he added.

“If events rapidly spiral, any material disruption to Iranian oil supplies or oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz could send oil prices well over $100 per barrel,” said Young.

The strait, between Oman and Iran, is a vital channel where about one fifth of global oil production flows daily, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. It is a strategically important waterway linking crude producers in the Middle East with key markets across the world.

Tens of thousands of people on both sides of the Israel-Lebanon border have been forced to evacuate their homes due to cross-border fire in the months following Hamas’s attack on Israel on Oct. 7, with Hezbollah throwing its support behind the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Environment

Greenpeace ordered to pay more than $660 million over Dakota Access Pipeline protests

Published

2 hours ago

on

March 20, 2025

By

Greenpeace ordered to pay more than 0 million over Dakota Access Pipeline protests

The Greenpeace logo on the green ecological awareness stand of the association in Lyon, France, on Oct. 23, 2024.

Elsa Biyick | Afp | Getty Images

A jury on Wednesday ordered environmental campaign group Greenpeace to pay more than $660 million in damages to Texas-based oil company Energy Transfer, the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

A nine-person jury in Mandan, North Dakota, reached a verdict after roughly two days of deliberations. The outcome found Greenpeace liable for hundreds of millions of dollars over actions taken to prevent the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline nearly a decade ago.

It marks an extraordinary legal blow for Greenpeace, which had previously warned that it could be forced into bankruptcy because of the case. The environmental advocacy group said it intends to appeal the verdict.

“This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations,” Greenpeace U.S. interim executive director Sushma Raman said in a statement published Wednesday.

“It’s part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponise our courts to silence dissent. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech,” Raman said.

Greenpeace has described Energy Transfer’s case as a clear-cut example of SLAPPs, referring to a lawsuit designed to bury activist groups in legal fees and ultimately silence dissent. SLAPP is an acronym for “strategic lawsuit against public participation.”

Energy Transfer said the jury verdict was a “win” for “Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law,” according to The Associated Press, citing a statement from the company.

“While we are pleased that Greenpeace has been held accountable for their actions against us, this win is really for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota who had to live through the daily harassment and disruptions caused by the protesters who were funded and trained by Greenpeace,” the company added.

A spokesperson for Energy Transfer was not immediately available to comment when contacted by CNBC on Thursday morning.

Continue Reading

Environment

Elon’s missing billions, Tesla terrorism, bots rig surveys, and a Nissan battery deal

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 20, 2025

By

Elon's missing billions, Tesla terrorism, bots rig surveys, and a Nissan battery deal

Is Elon Musk using the missing $1.4B to fund anti-Tesla protests as part of a massive false flag operation that will give him control of both the police and the courts? There’s absolutely ZERO evidence to support that idea (plus: I just made it up), but it’s 2025 and that means anything goes on today’s bats**t episode of Quick Charge!

If there’s one thing narcissists love it’s playing victim, and the guy who asked everyone at Trump’s inauguration if they’s seen Kyle and spent the last decade stacking billions by failing to deliver on a mission to mars, an all-electric roadster, an underground super-speedway, and a self-driving car seems to think it’s someone else’s fault that people don’t like him. We talk through the state of that debacle along with news from two credible car companies, and I predict Volvo will have the first mainstream L3 car in America – enjoy!

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, TuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Got news? Let us know!
Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump’s US Commerce Secretary, who owns Tesla stocks, publicly recommends to buy TSLA

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 20, 2025

By

Trump's US Commerce Secretary, who owns Tesla stocks, publicly recommends to buy TSLA

Tesla CEO Elon Musk with Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick

Trump’s US Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, who indirectly owns Tesla (TSLA) stocks through his firm, has publicly recommended buying Tesla stocks today.

This is likely the first time that a sitting US Commerce Secretary publicly recommends to buy a specific stock.

The circumstances in which this first is happening are genuinely astonishing.

Lutnick is known for his multi-billion-dollar stake and long-time leadership at the investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Starting in 2022, Cantor Fitzgerald began to buy Tesla stocks and significantly increased its investment in the automaker in 2024 during a bull run:

After Trump won the election last year with the help of a $250 million political donation from Elon Musk, the Tesla CEO started to recommend Lutnick for the significant role of Secretary of the Treasury. He tweeted:

My view fwiw is that Bessent is a business-as-usual choice, whereas Howard Lutnick will actually enact change. Business-as-usual is driving America bankrupt, so we need change one way or another,”

Trump ended up going for Bessent, but Lutnick still managed to land the role of Secretary of Commerce – with the help of Musk’s push.

After being nominated by Trump, Lutnick said that he would be divesting from his holdings, which are mainly linked to Cantor Fitzgerald, within 90 days.

The 90 days are not up yet, but there is no update on whether he has started divesting yet.

Today, he went on Fox News and recommended viewers buy Tesla stocks:

“I think if you want to learn something on this show tonight, buy Tesla. It’s unbelievable that this guy’s stock is this cheap. It’ll never be this cheap again,”

Here’s the video:

The blatant stock pump comes after Tesla’s stock lost more than 40% of its value so far this year.

Musk uses 238 million Tesla shares worth over $55 billion as collateral for personal loans. If Tesla’s stock goes too low, he could potentially be forced to sell his shares to cover the debt.

Furthermore, on the analyst side, Cantor Fitzgerald just upgraded Tesla’s stock to a buy earlier this week – raising their price target to $425 a share. Tesla’s stock closed at $235.86 today.

Howard Lutnick’s son, Brandon, is now in charge of Cantor Fitzgerald as Chairman.

Here’s a summary of Cantor Fitzgerald’s Tesla holdings:

  • Early 2022: The firm held a very small position (only ~8,400 Tesla shares in Q1 2022)​ but rapidly increased to about 297,000 shares by Q3 2022 (worth ~$79 million at the time)​. This large buy-in during mid-2022 marked a significant ramp-up in their Tesla exposure.
  • Late 2022: By the end of 2022, Cantor dramatically cut back its stake – holding roughly 72,000 shares in Q4 2022​. This reduction from nearly 300k shares the prior quarter coincided with a steep drop in Tesla’s stock price in late 2022 (shares fell by roughly 50% during Q4 2022).
  • 2023: Throughout 2023, Cantor Fitzgerald kept a modest Tesla position, fluctuating in the tens of thousands of shares. For example, they reported ~44,000 shares in Q1 2023, increased to 91,000 by Q2 2023, then adjusted to 56,000 in Q3 2023 and 83,000 by Q4 2023​.
  • These moves suggest active trading around Tesla’s short-term moves, with no huge long-only stake during 2023. Notably, it appears Cantor completely exited Tesla in early 2024 – Tesla was not listed in their Q1–Q2 2024 13F filings, implying they sold off the remaining shares during that period (when Tesla’s price rallied to local highs).
  • Re-entry in 2024: In the second half of 2024, Cantor Fitzgerald made a bold re-entry into Tesla. Their holdings surged to about 1.2 million shares in Q3 2024 (valued ~$307 million as of September 30, 2024). This coincided with a mid-2024 pullback in Tesla’s stock price, suggesting Cantor bought the dip. By the end of 2024, they trimmed the position down to ~740,000 shares (from 1.2M), likely taking profits after Tesla’s price rallied late in the year​.

Electrek’s Take

I mean, wow. This is something else.

The fact alone that a US secretary would recommend buying a specific stock is despicable, but it’s even more insane when it is the stock behind the fortune of Elon Musk, who has a relationship with Lutnick.

Lutnick’s Cantor invests in Tesla -> Musk invests in Trump -> Trump appoints Lutnick at Musk’s recommendation -> Tesla’s stock crash –> Trump recommends buying Tesla cars –> Lutnicks recommends buying Tesla stocks.

I’m no lawyer so I’m not going to claim whether this is legal or not, but it’s certainly not ethical.

Tesla must be really struggling if that’s what they are doing now: using US officials to promote Tesla’s stocks.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending